From owner-cvs-src@FreeBSD.ORG Wed Mar 9 14:30:37 2005 Return-Path: Delivered-To: cvs-src@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.freebsd.org [216.136.204.125]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 421CB16A4CE; Wed, 9 Mar 2005 14:30:37 +0000 (GMT) Received: from www.portaone.com (web.portaone.com [195.70.151.35]) by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 6058243D2D; Wed, 9 Mar 2005 14:30:36 +0000 (GMT) (envelope-from sobomax@portaone.com) Received: from [192.168.1.21] (SIRIUS-ats227-UTC.ukrtel.net [195.5.25.154]) (authenticated bits=0) by www.portaone.com (8.12.11/8.12.11) with ESMTP id j29EUWgf012861 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=NO); Wed, 9 Mar 2005 15:30:33 +0100 (CET) (envelope-from sobomax@portaone.com) Message-ID: <422F087F.9030906@portaone.com> Date: Wed, 09 Mar 2005 16:30:23 +0200 From: Maxim Sobolev Organization: Porta Software Ltd User-Agent: Mozilla Thunderbird 1.0 (Windows/20041206) X-Accept-Language: en-us, en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: =?ISO-8859-1?Q?Dag-Erling_Sm=F8rgrav?= References: <200503070726.j277Qhp5059059@repoman.freebsd.org> <20050308012939.GP11079@elvis.mu.org> <422DCF52.6080109@portaone.com> <20050308210414.GU11079@elvis.mu.org> <20050308232209.GX11079@elvis.mu.org> <422E3EC1.4050402@portaone.com> <20050309001301.GZ11079@elvis.mu.org> <422E407B.4080507@portaone.com> <86k6oht386.fsf@xps.des.no> In-Reply-To: <86k6oht386.fsf@xps.des.no> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-Virus-Scanned: ClamAV 0.80/685/Wed Jan 26 10:08:24 2005 clamav-milter version 0.80j on www.portaone.com X-Virus-Status: Clean cc: cvs-src@FreeBSD.ORG cc: Alfred Perlstein cc: src-committers@FreeBSD.ORG cc: cvs-all@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: cvs commit: src/sys/compat/linux linux_socket.c X-BeenThere: cvs-src@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.1 Precedence: list List-Id: CVS commit messages for the src tree List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 09 Mar 2005 14:30:37 -0000 Dag-Erling Smørgrav wrote: > Maxim Sobolev writes: > >>As I have said the binary program compiled on the newer system that >>uses this flag in some cases may malfunction when executed on system >>with older kernel due to the fact that that additional flag will >>become no-op the program might get SIGPIPE unexpectedly. > > > We've never cared about running newer binaries on older systems. It's > the reverse that matters, and the change Alfred suggests does not > break that. Even if we've never cared about that it really matters and IMHO we need to start caring about that esp. considering that sendto(2) and friends are very popular syscalls. That's not a big problem if you have sources handy, but what if it's some third party tool which is only available in binary code? Imagine that we are talking about some very big and very popular toolkit such as for example JDK, which takes ages to go through all compliance testing and such. Once it's packed, tested and rubberstamped for distribution you have zero chance to convince vendor to release another version that will run on both new and older systems even if it will mean changing two or three lines of their code. The only thing the vendor can do is to put some warning "will work correctly only starting from release X.Y", therefore forcing all users who run releases X.Z, Z < Y, and need this tool to upgrade otherwise perfectly working system(s). -Maxim